Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations: the result ordering ('newest first') and the locator-scoped nature of the list.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences, with the core purpose and ordering front-loaded, followed by a helpful usage hint. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is sufficient for a simple read-only list operation: it states scope, ordering, and a search usage hint. It doesn't explain return shape, but there is no output schema and the operation is low-complexity, so this is an acceptable gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 75%, so most parameters already have descriptions. The description adds modest emphasis on using 'search' for finding by name or address, but doesn't meaningfully expand on limit, offset, or visibility semantics beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('locations on this locator') and adds ordering ('newest first'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_location (single resource) and list_tags (different resource type).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context for using the search parameter to find a specific location before editing, which is actionable guidance. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the intended use case is reasonably clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.